Phil,
Thanks for bringing this up and I think this is the issue with
terminologies and NOT the concept of use of time for intervals.
Based on my interactions during technology integration of CAISO real-time market (RTM) with OpenADR, we have seen that
intervals could be used in different contexts. What you have is a
definition of "price intervals" is one element. For example, for CAISO,
under "prices" on -- http://oasis.caiso.com/mrtu-oasis/ -- the
intervals are used for time, price, etc. as seen below by definitions.
"Interval Locational Marginal Prices: Five-minute Locational
Marginal Prices for all PNodes and all APNodes in $/MWh, for each five-minute
interval RTM. Posts the LMP, plus the Congestion, Loss and Energy
Components that makes up the LMP."
"Interval AS Clearing Prices: Ancillary Services Regional Shadow
Price for all Ancillary Service types for all binding AS Regions and
Sub-Regional Partitions. Posts 15-Minute price relevant to the next 15
minute binding interval for RTM on a fifteen minute basis."
While I think the "monetary interval" you have is one important
element for DR, other element is also the "time interval." For
example, the time interval will determine the end-uses that could be
part of DR strategies and for what duration (or not). The length (time)
and the breadth (kW) are equally important. The price will determine
their willingness to participate and time will determine if they can
and by how much. This was also one of the thing we looked at the
recently concluded participating load pilot (PLP) that we conducted
with CAISO (see below).
Open Automated Demand Response Communications in Demand
Response for Wholesale Ancillary Services
Kiliccote S., M.A. Piette, G. Ghatikar, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory; E. Koch, D. Hennage, Akuacom; J. Hernandez, A. Chiu, O.
Sezgen, Pacific Gas and Electric Company; and J. Goodin, California
Independent Systems Operator. In the Proceedings of the Grid-Interop
Forum 2009, Denver, CO, November 17-19, 2009. LBNL-2945E. November 2009
http://drrc.lbl.gov/drrc-pubs-auto-dr.html
Moving forward, I think we should acknowledge this and be clear of
terminologies that are in use and have a certain meaning -- they should
retain their meaning as much as possible.
Thank you,
Rish
Phil Davis wrote:
7B0A1723EC5943CA9B38B022FE759310@us.schneiderelectric.com"
type="cite">
Keep in mind that when the ISO's refer to price
interval in their reports and analysis documents, they are referring to
a monetary interval rather than a time based interval. In other words,
there is a $15 price interval between an LMP of $45/mwh and $60/mwh.
Most usage in analysis is asks questions like "at what price interval
do large facilities respond to DR signals". These kinds of studies
influence incentives and subsidies, and may inform rate making in
regulated constructs. However, in the markets, the actual prices
themselves are known well in advance of Dr events since they are set at
auctions.
When modeling/forecasting for grid operations,
the ISO's will use this research to determine the likelihood of calling
an event and the cost of that event, given weather predictions at
various degrees of confidence (of the weather). Because of the usage,
I would reverse the wording somewhat; i.e., that for a given time
interval, there should be a price associated with it. Recipients would
use this data, especially in automated systems either to auto respond
or to signal managers if prices exceeded a pre-set level.
This happens to be a period of rapid rules
change following a relative period of stability. Predictions are
troublesome at best, but there seems to be a national trend toward
eliminating specific pricing for DR, and paying all parties the
generation equivalent of the energy product produced. this is not
without controversy, so our wisest course might be to allow for showing
prices for DR and for the underlying energy. This would support a
value calculation that encompasses both the overt value of DR plus the
value of the avoided purchase of energy for the same time interval.
Phil Davis
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Phil
Davis | Senior Manager | Schneider Electric
Demand Response Resource Center | 3103
Medlock Bridge Road, Ste 100 |
Norcross, GA 30071 | (: 404.567.6090 |
7: 678.672.2433 | Skype: pddcoo *: phil.davis@us.schneider-electric.com | : Website: http://www.schneider-electric.com
This came up during last
week's eMIX TC meeting -- What is the definition of price interval?
What elements/attributes are comprised in it?
For any price, there should be a standard "Time" factor associated with
it (unless the exception is there is "one" price for all periods).
I think we should make a key distinction of price schedule versus the
interval (if we ever can) and how the generic price intervals are
different from their definition in DR signals (the notion of DR
events).
Let's say for example, a price-responsive DR event in OpenADR may look
something like this (I am not saying this is how eMIX should address it
as the goal of sending the information and subsequent response may
differ) --
<p:drEventData>
<p:notificationTime>2010-02-08T15:17:21.000-08:00</p:notificationTime>
<p:startTime>2010-02-09T00:00:00.000-08:00</p:startTime>
<p:endTime>2010-02-09T23:59:59.000-08:00</p:endTime>
<p:eventInfoInstances>
<p:eventInfoTypeID>PRICE_ABSOLUTE</p:eventInfoTypeID>
<p:eventInfoName>price</p:eventInfoName>
<p:eventInfoValues>
<p:value>0.03638841</p:value>
<p:timeOffset>0</p:timeOffset>
</p:eventInfoValues>
</p:eventInfoInstances>
</p:drEventData>
What you see above is a definition of time slot (start and end time)
that has various attributes associated with it. Other attributes could
be for example, load shed, % shed, etc. However, all of these
attributes are associated with one time-slot notion, which is defined
by the period of DR event.
Thank you,
RIsh
--
Rish
Ghatikar
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
1 Cyclotron Road, MS: 90-3111, Berkeley, CA 94720
GGhatikar@lbl.gov | +1
510.486.6768 | +1 510.486.4089 [fax] |
This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain
confidential information and should not be copied without permission.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender as
soon as possible and delete the email from computer[s]. |
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for SPAM content and Viruses by the MessageL
abs Email Security System.
________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
--
Rish Ghatikar
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
1 Cyclotron Road, MS: 90-3111, Berkeley, CA 94720
GGhatikar@lbl.gov | +1 510.486.6768 | +1 510.486.4089 [fax] |
This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain
confidential information and should not be copied without permission.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender as
soon as possible and delete the email from computer[s]. |
|